The Labor enquirer., 1887-01-22
ran oPas1snAe1.
l(,unean<oS NJ 0nn -, 1

TuD oQGoy1nA0Ys
lCsaslu6s1' M nER unOAI
which Grinssll EsusoBsats. bat tWenty
psrsmplerv chslIsaess d criminal
cass. Amer he bed ssed twenty then
ell Others wsrs s9jeetsd u. bat Gary a.
l,wed them. and pslsensn' counsel took
exceptions which the supreme court
must pAss upon. II Rycs bv mistake
got an unprejudIcsd juror Grinnell used
. persmpsorvto gst rid Of him.
The eight men we're tried on charge
Of numbering Dsgan, and the indictment
had sixty counts In It. which me ms
that Il charged the sisht mem collect
lively and individually with committing
sixty crimes In the killing Of Degan.
Grinnell said In his closing arsumsnt
that Law Is on trial; Anarchy is on
trial. The defendants are on trial for
treason and MURDER" With the excep-
tIon Of the last word that whole SEN
tence Is deliberate falsehood. and tcl
to the jury unlawfully and for the pur-
pose Of exciting their prejudice.
Nothing can be on trial except what 10
charged In the indictment. Treason
must be charged in TIE indictment be-
fore II can be on trial. Gr,nnell knows
this and knew he was living 10 the jury.
A person might commit treason to es-
tabIish Anarchy and thus overthrow
law, but to put Anarchy and law on
trial, even on trial for treason. II must
appear in the indictment charging An
arcby or the overthrow Of Law, or the
law will presume that the treason is
committed for the purpose Of establish
ing some other legal authority. Grin
nell knows this and therefore knows
that there wasn't color Of truth In the
assertion that law and Anarchy were on
trial. ~
Supreme courts have frequently
granted new trial on the ground that
counsel deliberately lied 10 the jury to
excite their prejudice AMI the prison.
ers' counsel have put this mater into
their brief Tor the consideration Of
the supreme court in this case. Also
much Of the unlawful slander Gr,nnell
made use Of. such as calling them "or.
ganized asssssins and loathsome mnr-
derers." The law takes notice Of the
marked difference between argument
and slander and requires that counsel
shall conine themselves TO argument, as
the only safe means Of getting at the
facts and avoiding verdict founded on
prejudice and contrary 10 the facts, and
this provision Of the law Is both wise
and humane. and adds much TO the dig.
nifty Of state authority when the state
attorneys have manliness enough TO be
governed by II.
The only evidence In the whole case
that went 10 show that either Of the
prisoners bad ANYTHING TO do with the
throwing Of the bomb was gwen bv
Gilmer. whqo very name seems to
poison the page II appears upon, and his
testimony was contrsdicted by all the
witnesses on both sides who had any
occasion to testify to the same matters.
He said Spies lii the bomb in the alley
and schnsubelt threw II from there
that Fischer was with them aud that
Schnaubet Is short man. Every per.
son who ever saw Schnaubelt knows he
Is very tall aud II was proved bv several
witnesses that he stands six feel and
two Inches in his stockings. II was
proved positively that Spies had not LEFT
the wagon when the bomb vas thrown,
and that Fischer was sitting In Zepp's
hall talking with several parties when
the bomb was thrown. That Gilmer
lied when he said the bomb was thrown
from the alley Is shown by the positive
testimony Of four witnesses for The
state and six witnesses for the defense.
In charging the jury the Judge ignore ed
Gilmers testimony as unworthy of
notice, and told the jury In substance
that II was not pretended that either OF
the prisoners threw or aided in throw
ING the bomb or knew who did. but
they we're guilty he said u In speeches
or through the newspapers they had
given such general advice as led and en-
couraeed the unknown party to throw
the bomb.
How the jury were to know that un.,
known man did not have a personal
grudge against the police. and for that
reason threw the bomb. wholly on his
own account; how the jury were to
know beyond q reasonable doubt an un.
known man could read and did read
their articles, and could know beyond
doubt that he was influenced by them TO
throw the bomb or how the jury could
know beyond doubt that he did attend
their meetings In Chicago. and was thns
beyond doubt influenced to throw the
bomb, was more than the brazen.f ,ced
Gary ever attempted to explain. I
The whole case Ia such bare. faced
piece Of public rascality, bloodthirsty
lawlessness and underhand corrup.
iion that II stassess . mans credulity to
read the attested record Of 1t. Yet when
we realize that for weeks after the YER
dict. many persons were, bv the police
courts Of Chicago, fined aud imprisoned
for simply denouncing the verdict a.